Syllabi
| Jeffrey Helzner 2008 Fall T 4:10 PM- 6:00 PM | Download |
Early in the semester (Fall 05), Collins regaled the class with the story of a professor he once had in Australia. This professor would like to go on walks in the bush with no map, plan, compass, or anything, get lost, and find his way out again.
This, Collins said, is how he liked to teach.
I don't think I could imagine a worse class. There was no syllabus and no plan and my blood boils when I think about it. Epistemology is such a fascinating field of philosophy and Collins butchered it. Terrible.
Helzner is a very knowledgeable, smart professor. He enjoys the socratic style of teaching - sitting in a chair posing questions and poking holes in answers. That's a great technique but he doesn't often go beyond it and present lecture material to supplement the questioning. That means you won't often have a comprehensive treatment of a concept or material in class, which you may or may not prefer.
He is a brilliant professor who respects answers and students. His give and take in class is always generous and enjoyable. His math background makes him vulnerable to describing everything in math terms and symbols.
Excellent professor if you like his approach. Clearly brilliant.
Regular readings, midterm and final paper. Not too heavy but challenging material and enjoyable to think through.
...For all the reviewers who think he is a "brilliant philosopher" try taking a real philosophy course with a real philosopher not someone who simply tries to speak and act like one. If you want to do well in his class, you have to sort out what's really going on from his mess and actually learn something. To Collins: try thinking from now on and not going out of your way to create non-sense out of something intelligble. The former not the latter is what philosophy is all about.
A few writing assignments, a paper, midterm, and final. All easy if you have a brain.
Ah, Collins. Its like being in class with Socrates. He will construct a beautiful argument over the course of days, meticulously leading you by the nose through the finer points of modal logic or what have you, and then, just as you are feeling good that you can actually claim to know something, He counterexamples himself and sends you back to the drawing board. But isnt that just the way theory of knowledge is? You just know more about why you know nothing. As for Collinss presentation of it, it could use some organization. But he more than makes up for that in charm.
Midterm, Final, Final paper. There were supposed to be a number of short writing assingments, but they fell by the wayside. Collins is a fair grader of philosophical content, though he could care less about how many references to Kant you can make in a page. Midterm and Final require actual original thought (gasp).


Gold
Silver